On 4/02/2011 One Day Hero wrote:>Ok you farking heathens! Here are the 10 climbing commandments (with explanatory>notes) which thou shalt obey or, or.......you'll be condemmed to an eternity>of climbing nowhere but the following shitholes; Werribee, The Hole at>Norton Summit, KP, Hollywood, Wingello, and Mt Kiera! Tremble in fear,>fuchers!!!>>(most of these rules are plagerised from the prophets; Claw, Barber, Fantini>and Chouinard)>>#1) Thou shalt not die!>(seriously, it makes the sport look bad, and having to climb past pools>of blood is a bit gross and offputting)>>#2) Thou shall, from time to time, climb slabs and offwidths.........so>that thou doesn't get to thinking thou ist so hot!>>#3) Thou shalt travel to climb (to broaden thyne mind, and to bone exotic>foreigners)>>#4) Thou shalt not seek to reconcile climbing with OH+S ideals! (its a>no-win, people will still kill themselves, climbing will become bland,>and the onset of external regulation will be expediated)>>#5) Thou shalt not bone thyne climbing partner's little sister!...........unless>she's super-hot and you're in a terrible drought. (your most valuable asset>for getting cool climbing done is a good climbing partner, don't risk throwing>it away unless one night with their sister is really worth it!)>>#6) Thou shalt not dangle for an epoch at one place (lead or 2nd), thereby>tearing thyne partner's arse! Thou shalt swallow thy pride, pull on the>draw, and actually get some climbing done!>>#7) Thou shalt not worship false climbing such as campus boards!>>#8) Thou shalt not forsake sex for climbing......unless thy sex breaks>commandment#5 (you wouldn't think this one was needed, but I've seen it>happen!)>>#9) Thou shalt not develop any more single pitch, 15m, crimpy, soft, facey,>endurancey, ringbolted 22's on NSW crumblestone! (There are already enough>of these in existance for any sane person to be bored shitless 5 times>over, just stop it!)>>#10) Thou shalt not profane the prophet Ewbank by devaluing his mighty>grading system! (I'm looking at you here Monty, Dr Chris, Coolum boys).........I>recently belayed Fred from Colorado on Lee Cujes new "29" in Vietnam...........he>cruised to an onsight despite never having onsighted past 12c on real grades,>I felt shame!>>So let it be written, so let it be done..........you miserable farking>arseclowns!

Nice work ODH. A very worthwhile set of commandments. Fortunately I seem to be obeying all the commandments (particularly #8) and thus look forward to spending eternity at a crag of my choice.

On 4/02/2011 rodw wrote:>>Wanted to get to snowbird/alta and brighton/solitude but didnt have a>car and transfer was to much considering we had some much skiing on free>shuttles around us....next time ill probably hit both those places up.

You'll have to try the 'highway to heaven.' You ski off the back of Solitude down into LCC and can then play at Snowbird or Alta, or just cut touring laps through Grizzly Gulch. At Snowbird you can also take Gad 2 hike up White Pine ridge to the top of Twin Peaks and cut loose in any number of directions. You get the best of both worlds; lift access followed by some out of bounds goodness with minimal hiking.

You used to be able to ride the bus from downtown to the resorts in BCC and LCC with a valid lift ticket, though that may have changed.

Yeah no direct bus from park city to them and I had the wife and daughter with me so they baulked at the swaping of buses etc to get there...it was only 15 days which the 3 resort provided ample of fun anyway.

Best day was on last day with big dumb over night and skiing off Jupiter chair in waist deep powder..had those runs to myself and was like skiing back country without the shitty walks uphill.

On 4/02/2011 rodw wrote:>>They have done a bit of there own persecuting I do believe...Mountain>Meadows Massacre anybody???>>I think you having a bit of rose coloured glasses on there Monty...any>religion has moderates and fundamentalists and its the later thats the>issue....Mormanism has there fair share.

I missed this post. The Mountain Meadows Massacre happened and was/is a tragedy. Look at any religion that has something happening in the news and it's usually the fundamentalist causing the ruckus.

One thing I learned from talking to the St George Mormons was that the US has a much more violent history then we do here in Oz! So many people killing each other over things. We've had the Eureka Stockade, Cronulla Riots - and ??

On 4/02/2011 nmonteith wrote:>One thing I learned from talking to the St George Mormons was that the>US has a much more violent history then we do here in Oz! So many people>killing each other over things. We've had the Eureka Stockade, Cronulla>Riots - and ??

On 4/02/2011 Wendy wrote:>mass killing of aborigines at all ends of the country?

Yes - that's disgraceful but I guess I was alluding to the sort of mass civil wars (official and un-official) that seem to occur all over the USA in their first 200 or so years. I'm actually quite surprised that it managed to stay together as one country.

On 4/02/2011 nmonteith wrote:>One thing I learned from talking to the St George Mormons was that the>US has a much more violent history then we do here in Oz!

They have a very violent history indeed, unfortunately the violence is still occuring. Up until 1976 it was still 'legal' to kill a Mormon as per Missouri Executive Order 44, commonly called the Mormon extermination order.

>Put it this way Harry old son - for the greatest part of the last 2000>years I could have been tortured, murdered or incarcerated for criticising>Christianity.

1. Or put it this way Winston old son - for the greatest part of the last 2000
years I could have been tortured, murdered or incarcerated for practicing
Christianity.

2. Whats your point. Since it was Jesus Christ who instructed his followers to 'Treat others how you would like them to treat you', 'Love your neighbor as you love yourself', 'love your enemies', 'if someone hits you on the cheek, offer them your other cheek' etc etc it is hard to fathom how the above crimes could have been committed by someone practicing Christianity.

3. Evil people do evil things in the name of all sorts of religions, even atheism. Not because they are Christian, Muslim or Atheist, just because they are evil. The whole 'your religion is more evil than my religion' game bores me to tears.

On 4/02/2011 nmonteith wrote:>On 4/02/2011 Wendy wrote:>>mass killing of aborigines at all ends of the country?>>Yes - that's disgraceful but I guess I was alluding to the sort of mass>civil wars (official and un-official) that seem to occur all over the USA>in their first 200 or so years. I'm actually quite surprised that it managed>to stay together as one country.

That's cause Aussies still worship Queenie. If Henry Parkes had been a republican; there'd have been a massive war.

The Eureka stockade is still one of the biggest "untold" genocides where thousands of Chinese miners were murdered, raped and pillaged. That's why I cringe every time I see that flag waved as a symbol of "people's rights..."

In light of my whinge on this topic and other topics like 'should we use the words fag or gay', I have come up with a solution.

All comments containing insults must be equally balanced by humor. These comments will rated on a scale of 1 - 10 for both insultingness and funniness. Comments will only be accepted if the funniness value is greater than the insultingness value.
For example Winston's starting this topic in the first place gets an insult value of 6 and funniness value of 2 and is there for not acceptable.
On the other hand ODH's ten commandments gets 3/10 for insult and 8/10 for funniness. Pass!

Nice and simple. Now if some nerds can just write some code to automatically rate posts and delete anything which doesn't pass this test chockstone could be an awesome forum.

On 4/02/2011 harold wrote:>1. Or put it this way Winston old son - for the greatest part of the last>2000>years I could have been tortured, murdered or incarcerated for practicing>Christianity.>>2. Whats your point. Since it was Jesus Christ who instructed his followers>to 'Treat others how you would like them to treat you', 'Love your neighbor>as you love yourself', 'love your enemies', 'if someone hits you on the>cheek, offer them your other cheek' etc etc it is hard to fathom how the>above crimes could have been committed by someone practicing Christianity.>>3. Evil people do evil things in the name of all sorts of religions, even>atheism. Not because they are Christian, Muslim or Atheist, just because>they are evil. The whole 'your religion is more evil than my religion'>game bores me to tears.>
So, I reckon I'm gonna wade in.......sorry Harold, this post is probably gonna fail your test.

I place Christianity in the same basket (and I mean exactly the same basket) as UFO's and Kennedy assassination theories. Otherwise rational people have decided to believe firmly in something which can neither be proven nor disproven......therefore, debating the matter in a rational way is utterly pointless.

As long as no-one tries to push it down my throat, it ain't my business and I'll get along well with people who believe all sorts of crazy shit............but, start dropping hints about how I might want to attend an Alpha Course, and I will descend into a state of such childish vindictiveness that you'll wonder if its really happening.

That, and start paying some farking taxes! This would be a good way to get rid of marginally popular sects which are uncompetitive in the modern lie-distribution marketplace.

On 4/02/2011 dave h. wrote:>>Ignoring the debate about exactly how bad things were, the church was>wrong to do those things.

That is fuching awesome! I didn't even realise that the badness of the church in the middle ages was up for debate. Tell us your version of the story, where the Inquisition wasn't really all that crook............people shoulda hardened up a bit and quit their whinging, probably.

On 4/02/2011 widewetandslippery wrote:>on ODH post, fark I'm even a sinning climber ( I coveted but didn't bone>a climbing partners little sister, and she was HOT)

Not at all, Wide. The fact that you wanted to bone your mate's sister shows that you were a young male with a pulse. The fact that you didn't act on your natural desires means that you were a good climbing partner who valued his relationship with his mate over one night of really, really good sex with a barely legal hottie............hmmmm, maybe I gotta rethink that list.

Anyway, I didn't think that you'd be all that worried about an eternity of hellfire and choss, given your unnatural attraction to the pile of smeg known as Kiera!

On 4/02/2011 harold wrote:>>All comments containing insults must be equally balanced by humor. These>comments will rated on a scale of 1 - 10 for both insultingness and funniness.>Comments will only be accepted if the funniness value is greater than the>insultingness value.>>Nice and simple. Now if some nerds can just write some code to automatically>rate posts and delete anything which doesn't pass this test chockstone>could be an awesome forum.>
Nah, you're looking at it wrong. I see chocky like a bunch of climbers talking shit down the pub after a day at the crag.......but a bit more sad and lonely.

-If everyone is trying to set the world record for funniness every time they open their mouth, it'll get wierd and strained very fast.

-If every conversation stays strictly to one topic and continues on a straight path to an agreed conclusion, you might as well be at work.

-If everyone pushes really hard to change the topic all the time it'll just be incoherent babble......more awkwardness

-When the conversation becomes boring, as it will from time to time, just find a chick in the room who has a nice body and stare at her tits till the talking picks up again..........hmmmmm, that blonde in the red top over by the pool table...........what were you guys saying again?

Returning to your point about proof:>Otherwise rational people have decided to believe firmly in something which can neither >be proven nor disproven......therefore, debating the matter in a rational way is utterly >pointless.

Sounds like you're talking about an absolute standard of proof (ie 100% certainty).

Do you think that's an appropriate standard of proof to apply to a historical question? Would you apply it to any other historical question? Epistemological consistency surely suggests that you should.